I'm looking to get an octobox/dome/bank and I'm leaning toward the 7 footer just to get it over and done with but I'd like to hear peoples opinions on the 5 footers as well as the 7 footers before I commit to anything.
*Edit*
Also is a 7 footer more cumbersome to setup and work with than a 5 footer or are they about the same?
vbi
Posts: 63
Cape Town, Western Cape, South Africa
I have the 5 foot Rotolux and it is already quite a big beast. While a 7 foot will be softer it will occupy more space in your studio which is definately a consideration. One option is just to move the 5 foot octa closer to your subject.
I use Paul Buffs 47" octabox and I'm pretty happy with it. Course I shoot a lot of different things in many different locations. This size is big enough to light a small group (5-7) but small enough that I can use it in low hanging ceiling areas.
ArtistryImage
Posts: 2,302
Washington, District of Columbia, US
Flair, what are your endeavoring to achieve?
Is this for Studio; Location; or both?
If studio how large a shooting area do you have and how high are your ceilings?
Do you typically shoot with a full team?
Way too many undefined variables in the equation thus far for meaningful input...
That said I'm a big fan of strategically placed scrims... allows for WAY more control than a box... either in studio or on location...
Assisting on many commercial shoots... collapsible frames and scrims are the rule... you would be amazed at the source modifiers used behind these and to superb effect....
When it comes to controlling light, I generally find that a smaller source is more useful than a larger one. If you want a really soft light, put your medium softbox or octa really close to the model. You will get more flattering falloff that way too.
Michael Pandolfo wrote: I used a 7' Westcott Octabank on a shoot once and wasn't heard from for a month and a half.
is it true that the inner baffles have a unique pillowy softness and you can sleep inside one without any back issues?
I have 20 ft ceiling on one side and just 9ft on the other. I drew it out on paper and tried to see what placements were possible with the 7ft box on the right side. I quickly figured out that it would be pretty limited to 'straight on' shots or only slightly angled down if I raised it a bit or brought it in closer. It was an easy choice to just go with nothing bigger than 5ft for my studio space. you really need a lot of room in your studio space to contemplate one - like 12ft ceilings and 6 ft free on either side of the seamless. and probably need C stands so the feet of the stand dont hit the walls.
-B-R-U-N-E-S-C-I- wrote: "Bigger is always better"... right?
Not so.
When it comes to controlling light, I generally find that a smaller source is more useful than a larger one. If you want a really soft light, put your medium softbox or octa really close to the model. You will get more flattering falloff that way too.
I used to do this a lot but I hate hotspots and this tends to be a problem when it is really close, and the falloff is horrible. I like a little more consistent light across the face and skin with some shadow transition. If I am using an octabox (lets say the 53" rotalux from elinchrom) then I like it a good 6 feet away even for beauty.
Just my opinion though
Fashion you really need a bigger source and further away to create consistent light
vbi
Posts: 63
Cape Town, Western Cape, South Africa
Read an interesting theory that said that the optimum distance for a softbox was the diameter for an octa and the diagonal distance for a square softbox. Supposed to give the ideal mix of falloff vs pop.
DAVfoto wrote: I hate hotspots and this tends to be a problem when it is really close, and the falloff is horrible.
Personal preference I guess
I quite like the falloff from a really close light source and you can control the majority of hotspots with good makeup.
Sure, bigger can be better in some cases - I just don't want the OP to fall into the trap of assuming that bigger must always be better, because it certainly is not.
I quite like the falloff from a really close light source and you can control the majority of hotspots with good makeup.
Sure, bigger can be better in some cases - I just don't want the OP to fall into the trap of assuming that bigger must always be better, because it certainly is not.
I just ordered a 36in might have been a mistake but its the size of my umbrellas. They just become too big and possible tilt over. I am talking about using them outdoors. A beauty dish is commonly 22in and many have used it with success.
JGC Photography
Posts: 108
Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
I got to play with some big sources at a friend's studio.
A 5 footer does the same thing as a 7 footer...Just needs less power and to be a bit closer.
We couldn't see any difference between a 7 foot soft box and an umbrella. A 7 foot umbrella with a cover does the same thing and takes up a lot less space.
Maybe I missed something here (build quality is better on the sbox).
The Chimera Octaplus Expandable bank is the way to go if you can spring for it. I've been using the Photoflex 5ft and it works well for the spaces I work with. However, when I have the room I wish I had the 7ft model.
| 
| 
| edu